JUMP TO HOME PAGE

 

JANUARY 01-2019

 

QUOTE: People can't believe in civilization without being certain that a society will organize itself to do what it can do to make wrong, right. Testimony Scott Turow

 

December 17-2018

 

TO: Premier Hon. Scott Moe                    FROM: Roger Callow

PERSONAL  & CONFIDENTIAL                       1285 Cahill Drive E. #2001

226 Legislative Bdlg. Rm 226                                         Ottawa, Ontario K1V 9A7

Regina, SK S4S 0B3                                              F. 613-521-1739

fax: 306-787-0885                                                  employeescasecanada.ca

11 pages sent by Registered Mail              e-mail: rcallow770 @ gmail.com

 

CORRESPONDENCE

(to be included in an action currently being filed in Saskatoon:)

 

Plaintiff: Roger Callow self represented

 

Defendants: 1) West Vancouver School Trustees    2) West Vancouver Teachers Association

(a copy of this letter is included to both defendants and the Saskatoon court concerned)

 

MESSAGE:

1) This case is the single most important case in Canadian Jurisprudence as it exposes the Canadian Justice System in a manner of moral turpitude never before encompassed. From that there is no return.

2) This current charge against the Defendants in SK is for civil fraud and involves  nefarious elements from SK in previous hearings beneath Premier Brad Wall.

3) One unique aspect of this case is the listing of judges whom I have accused of malfeasance; a malfeasance which the oversight bodies in both courts and governments refuse to acknowledge explaining their inclusion here. Should the government wish to continue on this aspect, a special prosecutor would be required. I am available with additional information for the purpose if that is the government's choice.

4) A second feature relates to fiat law by which governments would seek to escape Parliamentary and judicial overview. For example, as the senior teacher concerned, I am in the unique position of challenging B.C.'s imposed BILL 35 (1985) in an unresolved labour case where no compensation has been paid. Does the court have such oversight power? That is a central question currently in SK's challenge to the Federal Government's Carbon (tax?). Again, the government may wish to use findings from this case to augment their own case currently before the SK courts.

5) The third point is non  negotiable. I demand disclosure as outlined in my factum. The Defendants have been given permission by me to provide legal counsel for which I hold in abeyance any threat of direct action against them for this case.

6) Should it be required, I ask that Premier Moe shepherd this matter through the Saskatoon Registry.

 

Thanking you in advance for your support,

 

Roger Callow (signed)

 

FORM 3-49  (10 pages)

(Rule 3-49)

 

COURT FILE NUMBER

_______________________________________

 

Clerk's Stamp

COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN

JUDICIAL CENTRE

_Saskatoon______________________

APPLICANT(S)

Roger Callow_____________________

RESPONDENT(S)

1) West Vancouver School Trustees School District (45) West Vancouver, British Columbia  2) West Vancouver Teachers Association

 

ORIGINATING APPLICATION

 

NOTICE TO THE RESPONDENT(S)

 

This application is made against you. You are a respondent.

 

You have the right to state your side of this matter before the Court. To do so, you must be in Court when the application is heard as shown below:

 To be assigned by the court by teleconferencing (one hour) in Saskatoon

 

Where

 

Date

 

Time

 

 

Go to the end of this document to see what you can do and when you must do it.

 

[Using consecutive numbered paragraphs:

 

1 set out a concise statement of the material facts giving rise to the claim; and

 

2 set out each remedy sought and indicate against which respondent that remedy is sought; and

 

3 identify the affidavit or other evidence to be used to support the application]

 

1. Disclosure as outlined in Form 5-11A (both Defendants)

 

 

2.

 

 

3.

DATED at  Ottawa, Ontario  this  17th day of  December ,2018

 

(signature)

 

NOTICE

 

You are named as a respondent because you have made or are expected to make an adverse claim with respect to this originating application. If you do not come to Court either in person or by your lawyer, the Court may make an order declaring you and all persons claiming under you to be barred from taking any further proceedings against the applicant(s) and against all persons claiming under the applicant(s). You will be bound by any order the Court makes, or another order might be given or other proceedings taken, which the applicant(s) is(are) entitled to make without any further notice to you. If you want to take part in the application, you or your lawyer must attend in Court on the date and at the time shown at the beginning of this form.

 

The rules require that a party moving or opposing an originating application must serve any brief of written argument on each of the other parties and file it at least 3 days before the date scheduled for hearing the originating application.

 

If you intend to rely on an affidavit or other evidence when the originating application is heard or considered, you must serve a copy of the affidavit and other evidence on the originating applicant at least 10 days before the originating application is to be heard or considered.

 

 

 

CONTACT INFORMATION AND ADDRESS FOR SERVICE

 

If prepared by a lawyer for the party:

 

Name of firm:

___________________________________________

 

Name of lawyer in charge of file:

___________________________________________

 

Address of legal firms:

____________________________________________________

(set out the street address)

 

Telephone number:

___________________________________________

 

Fax number (if any):

___________________________________________

 

E-mail address (if any):

___________________________________________

 

or

 

Address for service and contact information of party filing this document:

 

Name of party:

ROGER CALLOW

 

Address for service:             

1285 CAHILL DRIVE #2001 OTTAWA,ONTARIO KIV 9A7

 

Telephone number: 

613-521-1739  (SAME AS FAX)

 

Fax number (if any):                        

__________________________________________

 

E-mail address (if any):

rcallow770@ gmail.com

 

1) CONCISE  STATEMENT

a) This charge of civil fraud follows on the recent actions of British Columbia Supreme Court Chief Justice Hinckson and others in courts in Ontario, Quebec, and Saskatchewan in the judiciary in a British Columbia based Labour Case.

b) Hence the question of jurisdiction in Saskatchewan is to be evaluated.

c) By failing to call for disclosure, Justice Hinckson cj has abetted a fraud reflected in the failure of over 50 judges including the Supreme Court of Canada over a period of 33 years to call for the all important disclosure which, it is alleged here, would demonstrate fraud.  

d) The nature of the Hinckson's cj 'oblique' action has impaired continuing in B.C. Courts by this appellant.

e) Currently this matter regarding Hinckson cj has been relegated to the New Democratic Party government in British Columbia for adjudication. There has been no response to date.

f) It is due to the failure of the oversight bodies in both the Justice System and Government to acknowledge serious malfeasance by specific judges which explains why their names are being included in this filing.

(i) Ottawa Supreme Court Justices C. McKinnon and R. Scott whom, it is alleged here, conspired with the Employer's Ontario lawyer, Hicks, Morley et al to pervert the course of Justice in 2014. The latter has since dropped representing  the Employer. It is this fraud which permeates cases in all other venues

(ii) Those other venues lie in Quebec, Saskatchewan (2016), Nova Scotia (2017) British Columbia (2018).  The alleged fraud in Saskatchewan relates to an Appeal Court which held a secret voir dire with the Respondent Employer without my knowledge in which it was agreed that they would not be heard in court to answer my charges vis a vis the inclusion of the Ontario material of McKinnon j./Scott j. Nor was disclosure called for as I requested. In addition Surety payments were made without a proper court Order.

g) As it would take a special prosecutor to pursue the charges against the judges above and because this part of the charge is of limited  interest to this plaintiff, details of their perfidy, other than in Saskatchewan , is not included here.

 

REMEDY SOUGHT

1) The focus of the remedy is to produce disclosure in order to define the nature of the fraud which all judges to date have failed to provide. That charge applies to both of the respondents for their copies. The court may have to order the  RCMP (Montreal Fraud Squad has a dossier) to seize these documents.

2) The Employer refuses to pay compensation without a court order on the grounds that the court has no oversight powers over imposed legislation which is currently a topic regarding Saskatchewan's challenge to the imposed Carbon Tax (or facsimile). The question to be asked here is how the Province may reject imposed legislation in the macrocosm only to accept imposed legislation in the microcosm. In short, to put it in the vernacular, they cannot 'suck and blow' at the same time. This plaintiff was laid-off from his senior teaching position in West Vancouver, B.C. in June of 1985 under the conditions of the imposed BILL 35 (BRITISH COLUMBIA 1985). The Employer lost their Appeal in B.C. Court on that point where the lower court had quashed the arbitration in their favour ruling the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable for failing to show a causal factor. As the plaintiff, I have been left in limbo for the past 33 years. The disclosure sought is for the minutes of the School Board Trustees in West Vancouver of June 1985 which Justice Mary Southin called for and then returned to the Employer and the lawyer I hired to replace lawyers favouring the Union case. If he had turned my copy over to me rather than to the Union, we would not be here today. Under a Freedom of Information Request in 2004, I learned that two out of the five trustees had approved the lay-off under Bill 35; namely, Chairperson, Margo Furk, and her successor, Mike Smith. Other material supplied in the Arbitration but conspicuous by its absence from his Decision illustrate most clearly, it is alleged here, that a fraud had indeed taken place. As my salary was curtailed on November 04, 1985 before this arbitration was held, (a point challenged by the Union in the arbitration), I have been without compensation since that time (includes Pension rights for 12 years as the School Board did not recognize my retirement notice to them). Justice Southin did not see fit to return me to salary; a 'stunt', according to my then legal counsel, Harry Rankin, that she could not get away with. Well, she has 'got away with it up to the present day' including her second sitting on this case as the leading judge of an Appeal Case launched by me at the turn of the millennium. (She retired in 2004).

 

THE ABOVE TWO TOPICS UNDER THE HEADINGS OF 'CONCISE STATEMENT' AND 'REMEDY SOUGHT' IS MY COMPLETE CASE ALTHOUGH I AM PREPARED TO PROVIDE FURTHER MATERIAL ON REQUEST BY THE COURT.

 

DUE TO THE LINK WITH THE IMPOSED CARBON TAX, A COPY OF THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE BEING PROVIDED TO PREMIER MOE.

 

FOR THIS SINGLE OCCASION, I WILL NOT PURSUE LEGAL COUNSEL SEPARATELY. (THEY HAVE NOT APPEARED IN RECENT HEARINGS BUT I ASK FOR A 20 PAGE LIMITED RESPONSE TO PERTINENT MATERIAL IN THIS CASE i.e. NO 500 WORD 'BILLABLE TIME' FACTUMS. TO DATE, THEIR POSITION, UNCHALLENGED BY THE COURT, IS TO CLAIM THAT THIS LITIGANT IS MERELY RE-ARGUING MATTERS WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN SETTLED WITHOUT DETAILING WHICH MATTERS HAVE BEEN SETTLED AND HOW THEY HAVE BEEN SETTLED. HENCE THE CHARGE OF BEING 'FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS' AS A MEANS OF DISPOSING OF THIS UNRESOLVED ISSUE IS PRIMARILY A FAILURE OF THE MANY COURTS ASSIGNED THIS CASE TO DATE TO PURSUE THOSE ANSWERS. THAT HAS TO CHANGE. PROVIDING DISCLOSURE IS THE FIRST STEP FOR REMEDIATION.

 

THIS CASE HAS GONE ON FOR FAR TOO LONG AND IS TAKING ITS TOLL IN UNEXPECTED DIRECTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, NOVA SCOTIA HAS CANCELLED THEIR SCHOOL BOARDS AS NO DOUBT FEAR OF A 'WINGNUT' SCHOOL BOARD PROVOKING A $20 MILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT IS SOMETHING THEY WISH TO AVOID AT ALL COSTS. OTHER PROVINCES HAVE TALKED OF ELIMINATING SCHOOL BOARDS AS WELL.

 

Form 5-11A

(Subrule 5-11(2))

 

 

COURT FILE NUMBER

_______________________________________

 

Clerk's Stamp

COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN

JUDICIAL CENTRE

Saskatoon______________

PLAINTIFF(S)

Roger Callow _______________________________________

DEFENDANT(S)

1) Board of School Trustees (School District #45 West Vancouver, British Columbia )  2)West Vancouver Teachers Association _____________

 

 

 

NOTICE TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS

 

 

TAKE NOTICE that the plaintiff requires you to produce their inspection the following documents:

' The missing memo notes' outlined elsewhere in the documents of British Columbia's Supreme Court Justice Mary Southin who quashed the original arbitration ruling the arbitrator to be 'patently unreasonable' for failing to show a causal factor. I was left in a state of limbo. These memo notes returned to the Employer and Union related to meetings held by the two entities in June of 1985. These notes were not included in the 'access to information' request that I made in 2004. The Employer steadfastly refuses in courts to produce this evidence which would outline the case against them as a currently laid action for civil fraud. The Union also refuses to provide me with a copy which is my right to possess.

 

 

 

DATED  at Ottawa, the 17th day of December 2018

 

_______________________

Roger Callow - Plaintiff

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTACT INFORMATION AND ADDRESS FOR SERVICE

 

1)Board of School Trustees                                              

(School District  #45 West Vancouver, British Columbia)                          

1075-21st Street, West Vancouver, British Columbia  V7V 4A9   

tel: 604-981-1000   fax: 604-981-1001                                    Defendant #1

and

2) West Vancouver Teachers Association (Local  School District Number 45)

ATTN: Renee Willock - President

4915 Marine Drive

West Vancouver, British Columbia V7W 2P5

tel: 604-926-1617  fax: 604-926-1119                                    Defendant #2         

 

 

Address for service and contact information of party filing this document:

 

Name of party:

Roger Callow__________________

 

Address for service:

1285 Cahill Drive  #2001 Ottawa, Ontario     K1V 9A7

 

Telephone number:

613-521-1739_(same as fax number)

 

Fax number (if any):

__________________________________________

 

E-mail address (if any):

rcallow770@gmail.com__________

 

 

 

AFFIDAVIT of FACTS

 

I, Roger Callow of the City of Ottawa, in the Province of Ontario, swear and affirm the following is true:

1. I turned 65 on August 24, 2006, which brought into play my pension rights;

2. My pension rights are determined on the basis of contributions to the plan, both mine and the employers;

3. The amount of these contributions is dependent on the date of termination of my employment;

4. Because I was a tenured teacher, my employment could only be determined by a proper legal process;

5. In my case the validity of the termination has never been determined. Technically although I was unable to work and was not paid, I remained a teacher under the employment of the Board;

6.I require that a proper termination date be determined, or a settlement be achieved providing me compensation which would include pensionable service benefits;

7. The recent pension inquiries caused me to examine how I could get compensation or a termination date determined. There is no other remedy I can pursue other than as requested in this petition.

8. Whatever approach is made, disclosure as outlined above is at the root of any successful remedy.

 

SEAL: in the Province of Ontario (Ottawa) on  DECEMBER, 17,2018

 

Form 12-15

(Subrule 12-15(2))

 

 

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE - Civil Fraud - Statement of Claim

 

I, Roger Callow, of 1285 Cahill Drive #2001 Ottawa, Ontario K1V 9A7

tel: 613-521-1739   e-mail: rcallow770@gmail.com

(name)                                                       (address)

 

AFFIRM: Service on party personally (Registered mail receipts in court copy only)

On DECEMBER,17, 2018 , I sent by Registered mail  to: 

1)Board of School Trustees                                              

(School District #45 West Vancouver, British Columbia)                           

1075-21st Street, West Vancouver, British Columbia V7V 4A9   

tel: 604-981-1000   fax: 604-981-1001                                    Defendant #1

and

2) West Vancouver Teachers Association (Local  School District Number 45)

ATTN: Renee Willock - President

4915 Marine Drive

West Vancouver, British Columbia  V7W 2P5

tel: 604-926-1617  fax: 604-926-1119                                     Defendant #2       

 

with the  Civil Fraud in a Statement of Claim dated December 17, 2018

(identify document served by name and date)

SWORN (OR AFFIRMED) BEFORE ME

}

_________________________

 (signature)

at, __Saskatoon________ Saskatchewan,

this _____17______day of  DECEMBER,

In the year _2018_

___________________________________

Commissioner for Oaths  

for Saskatchewan

                                                                                 NOTARIZED  IN  OTTAWA

 

Court address: Court of Queen's Bench / 520 Spadina Crescent East. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 3G7  t: 306-933-5135

 

TO THE REGISTRAR

 

     I REQUIRE A CERTIFIED COPY of the Disclosure indentified in this factum elsewhere which is the primary reason for attending court in Saskatchewan. That disclosure is vital to action currently pending  elsewhere. The Employer and Union have a long history of denying this disclosure in courts in and outside of British Columbia.

 

AFFIDAVIT

Between:

 

Roger Callow

1285 Cahill Drive #2001

Ottawa, Ontario K1V 9A7

t: 613-521-1739

e-mail: rcallow770@gmail.com                                             Plaintiff (self represented)

 

                                                                        and:

1)Board of School Trustees                                              

(School District #45 West Vancouver, British Columbia)                           

1075-21st Street, West Vancouver, British Columbia  V7V 4A9   

tel: 604-981-1000   fax: 604-981-1001                                  Defendant #1

and

2) West Vancouver Teachers Association (Local  School District Number 45)

ATTN: Renee Willock - President

4915 Marine Drive

West Vancouver, British Columbia  V7W 2P5

tel: 604-926-1617  fax: 604-926-1119                                         Defendant #2

 

AFFIDAVIT attesting to validity of documents herein enclosed

 

I, (full name of deponent) of  Roger Callow in the Province of Ontario (Ottawa)

AFFIRM:

1. That the material in this factum signed by the Plaintiff dated DECEMBER 17, 2018 is an accurate account of the material facts included. (N.B. excluding delivery notice which will be accompanied later with PO receipt to court copy only.)

 

Signed (Roger Callow)